Maybe she’s born with it? Maybe it’s photo shopped?

Maybe she’s born with it? Yeah right! Has it ever crossed your mind- why the people covering the pages of glossy magazines or why those on the big screen look much leaner, longer and lavish than us average folk? Do you wonder why their cheekbones are much more defined? Why their hair is much sleeker and shinier? Or how they have fewer than four wrinkles? There is one simple answer to these questions, the art of Photo-shopping; The master of manipulative technology!

Today in our present society magazines are presenting and advertising a certain type of body image which is far from natural. Don’t get me wrong, the final shots printed in a magazine mostly always appear flawless, but they are not portraying what was really in front of that camera lens. The finished article from a photo shoot is technically art; It is the editor’s perception of beauty, the editor’s view of the perfect appearance. Although in the public we are well aware that photo shopping does occur everywhere, I am not convinced that we know just how far the process of photo shopping can actually go. Yes, models are made to look as light as a feather and yes they have perfect, blemish free skin but photo shopping can go much further than that. This is perfectly illustrated in this video, showing the process of photo shopping, illustrating just how unrealistic our views on body image can be!

Before and after shot from Britney Spears 2013 music video ‘Work B****’.

The idea of the ‘thinspiration’ is when members of the public drool and fixate over models or celebs. They long to have that slender frame with a flat toned stomach, those long defined pins or even the increasingly popular thigh gap. Although the problem arises when they spot there so called ‘thinspiration’ in the latest edition of Vogue or Elle, as the beauty they see and desire is achieved via photo shopping. Therefore, it is a highly unrealistic goal. As both women and men are digitally altered, consequently so are our perceptions of “normal, healthy, beautiful and attainable” .

People have recently caught on to the worrying idea that celebs might now be editing and photo shopping there own photos for their own social media sites. I’m not sure what is more concerning… The fact that celebrities such as Kim K (shown above) feels the need to edit her daily selfie? Or the idea that younger generations and fandoms who obsess over such celebs may be influenced by these misleading shots? In the photo above – the right photo is a photo posted online by Kim Kardashian, in this photo she appears to look thinner, more slight and also have a smaller waist in comparison to the photo on the left which shows her out and about that same day. Do these celebs ever think of the example they are setting for younger generations eager to follow there footsteps? Or is their biggest concern looking their best? Even if that does mean digitally shedding a few pounds.

To end on a happy note, lets all take a leaf out of Kara Zeschbach and Janet Sahm’s book, as Ashley Crouch tells us the founders of Verily magazine want us to remember that “the unique features of women, whether crows feet, freckles, or a less-than-rock-hard body, are aspects that contribute to women’s beauty and should be cleberated- not shamed, change or removed” (Crouch, Huffington Post, 2013). In my next post I will be looking at how people see perfection in their celebrity role models and how in some cases the idea of ‘copy cat’ fashion can be taken to the extreme. In the mean time, don’t forget to follow me on twitter @Jones94L Thanks for reading, until next time!

Post navigation

One thought on “Maybe she’s born with it? Maybe it’s photo shopped?”

You’re addressing a sickeningly common problem with female advertising that brings so many beautiful women down! Your use of images ie. the before and after photo-shop ones, and the videos make it interactive (but even more infuriating!) I do however feel that magazines and ad campaigns are starting to ‘get it’ – in the way that they are starting to understand how refining images into unrealistic ones tends to isolate their readership, pushing for less tragically computer-refined models. Cosmo’s editor Joanna Coles has said in an interview that she is striving to make her magazine more believable – using Sarah Jessica Parker on a cover once with absolutely no make-up; yet no one believed her! I think slowly but surely we’ll get there, but in the meantime we all need to be aware that not all is what it seems. Great post on a great topic! Looking forward to seeing more!